Yes, Cedar Bay/Arcwide are a partner who offer a solution.  There may be others.

Hi,

Have you tried out the Warehouse Data Collection solution in core. You can do report picking and a lot of other activities without printing out a pick list, count report etc. It is a very flexible tool where you can configure your processes.

Best Regards

Fredrik

@Fredrik Johansson LKP If warehouse operator needs to view the picklist and action upon, will that be possible in WADACO?

HI,

Not sure exactly what you would like to see. WaDaCo is highly configurable when it comes to which information to see. In addition I believe that in recent versions the list of values has been improved. It is possible to include more info and configure which info to include. To help out selecting the next line to pick for instance. 

Best Regards

Fredrik

@Fredrik Johansson LKP If warehouse operator is doing picking based on the printed picklist that we send to warehouse, without printing is there a way that warehouse user can view the picklist and perform the picking? 

Hi @Rasika Lakmal 

With the introduction of configurable LOV functionality in Cloud 23R2 release the data item that would match the pick list line, unique_line_id have more information added to it so if you open that LOV it would be possible to see all the pick list lines that way, if that is necessary to decide which line to pick.

Also note that default handling of the pick list functionality in wadaco is setup so it will auto-pick (select) each pick list line for you to pick so it becomes like a guided process if you like. The order will follow the same order as they are created and shown in the pick list report which follows the route order sorting so it can be tweaked a bit. So the system is setup so you can pick without having a need for a printed pick list.

This will depend on the larger broader requirement for the organization, but you can use Warehouse Tasks in conjunction with Warehouse Data Collection.

A user working in the warehouse can sign onto  a device and search through available Warehouse Tasks, one of which may be a Customer Order Pick List.

In order for the user to be guided through the warehouse in an efficient path, the Route Orders for the respective locations should be defined in a logical format.  

If the task functionality is not required, you can go directly to the configurations in WaDaCo as Dario and Fredrik have indicated.  

@Dario Zani do you know if there is way to order the WaDaCo  Report_Picking_Part based on the location_no from lowest to highest?  We want our pickers to be able to go in a serpentine route through the distribution center.  Currently the pick list seems random, and they are zig zagging back and forth.

In the Report Picking of Pick List Lines page it is the Route Order defined on Warehouse, Bay, Row, Tier, Bin that decides the sorting, I think this is used in WaDaCo as well. You can manually add sorting there to control in which order you access Warehouse Bay, Row, Tier and Bins.

The route order is defaulted but you can manually change if desired. You can choose on which level you set up this depending on what is needed. For example if two bays are on different sides if the same aisle, then you add the same route order to these bays to get the locations within these to be picked before moving on to another bay.

Hi @MrBarnes 

Yes Fredrik is correct, the route order option was created for things like this and can be used from the wadaco process also (it also controls how the picking lines are presented in the report). The template configuration will give you this order as long as you don’t move around the data items too much or remove the auto-pick LOV setting on the UNIQUE_LINE_ID data item, since this whole route order sorting is controlled only from inside the LOV functionality of this data item, Plus I have seen some customers move items like PART_NO or LOCATION_NO before UNIQUE_LINE_ID in the configuration, then you will also break the route order sorting.

@Fredrik Johansson LKP and @Dario Zani thank you for your responses.  I neglected to mention we are on APPS 10, but your information is still helpful, and I am learning.  I looked at our inventory location and from my limited experience in this area, they look correct.  Here is a screenshot of what we have set up.  (I moved all the columns I could find pertaining to route order together.)

What I want to accomplish is to have the pick list ordered by just row lowest to highest.  But as you can see from the Report Picking of Pick List Lines screen, it is not the case.  This is the same order that our pickers see on they scanners.

What am I missing? 

Thank you

Mike

This functionality exist in apps10 also.

Could show the settings on data items tab of the configuration you are using in this environment, just to make sure you are not breaking the built-in route order sorting..

Is this the screen you are asking for?

Yes that’s the one. It looks ok from what I could see. First I was suspicious if your settings on LOCATION_NO could cause any issues or not. But thinking about it and checking the code it should be safe in this case, it would have been worse if you had set Use Subsequent Value for Fixed, but here its the Default so it shouldn’t affect router order sorting on UNIQUE_LINE_ID.

Is this configuration linked/started with the START_PICKING process, that could change the sorting a bit but it should still keep the initial route order sorting, it only adds some extra criteria's in the end of the sorting to group lines with the same location and handling unit together to simulate how the aggregated tab looks in the normal picking window.

To be 100% sure having a copy of the route order sorting as the regular client/report have it would be better to run the pick part process as a standalone flow without Start Picking, but would only be fine if your pick lists don’t consist of both parts and handling units, for mixed pick lists the Start Picking flow is the recommended one. 

But if I understood you correctly you don’t even get the route order sorting you were expecting in the normal picking window either, then I have no clue what the problem is, maybe @Fredrik Johansson LKP have some better clues.

@Dario Zani thank you for the input.  Yes, the configuration is linked to the START_PICKING.  I am new to the WaDaCo component so your insight has very beneficial.  Thank you again for your time. 

@Dario Zani @Fredrik Johansson LKP It looks like my pick lists are being sorted by bay not row.  Do either of you know how to the column it is sorting by?

The technical route order looks like this:

order by &AO.Utility_SYS.String_To_Number(WAREHOUSE_ROUTE_ORDER) ASC, UPPER(WAREHOUSE_ROUTE_ORDER) ASC, &AO.Utility_SYS.String_To_Number(BAY_ROUTE_ORDER) ASC, UPPER(decode(BAY_ROUTE_ORDER, ' -', &AO.Database_SYS.Get_Last_Character, BAY_ROUTE_ORDER)) ASC, &AO.Utility_SYS.String_To_Number(ROW_ROUTE_ORDER) ASC, UPPER(decode(ROW_ROUTE_ORDER, ' -', &AO.Database_SYS.Get_Last_Character,ROW_ROUTE_ORDER)) ASC, &AO.Utility_SYS.String_To_Number(TIER_ROUTE_ORDER) ASC, UPPER(decode(TIER_ROUTE_ORDER, ' -', &AO.Database_SYS.Get_Last_Character, TIER_ROUTE_ORDER)) ASC, &AO.Utility_SYS.String_To_Number(BIN_ROUTE_ORDER) ASC, UPPER(decode(BIN_ROUTE_ORDER, ' -', &AO.Database_SYS.Get_Last_Character, BIN_ROUTE_ORDER)) ASC, LOCATION_NO,SOURCE_REF1,LPAD(SOURCE_REF2,4),LPAD(SOURCE_REF3,4),SOURCE_REF4

@Dario Zani that explains why I am getting the order I am.

@Dario Zani whoever setup this company warehouses switched the rows and bays around.  They set it up rows-bays-tiers-bins not bays-rows-tiers-bins like I see in the documentation.  This is why the sort is off.  Do you know of an easy way around this that is not a mod?

The Default Order by clause on that screen is this:

order by
&AO.Utility_SYS.String_To_Number(WAREHOUSE_ROUTE_ORDER) ASC,
UPPER(WAREHOUSE_ROUTE_ORDER) ASC,
&AO.Utility_SYS.String_To_Number(BAY_ROUTE_ORDER) ASC,
UPPER(decode(BAY_ROUTE_ORDER, '  -', &AO.Database_SYS.Get_Last_Character, BAY_ROUTE_ORDER)) ASC,
&AO.Utility_SYS.String_To_Number(ROW_ROUTE_ORDER) ASC,
UPPER(decode(ROW_ROUTE_ORDER, '  -', &AO.Database_SYS.Get_Last_Character,ROW_ROUTE_ORDER)) ASC,
&AO.Utility_SYS.String_To_Number(TIER_ROUTE_ORDER) ASC,
UPPER(decode(TIER_ROUTE_ORDER, '  -', &AO.Database_SYS.Get_Last_Character, TIER_ROUTE_ORDER)) ASC,
&AO.Utility_SYS.String_To_Number(BIN_ROUTE_ORDER) ASC,
UPPER(decode(BIN_ROUTE_ORDER, '  -', &AO.Database_SYS.Get_Last_Character, BIN_ROUTE_ORDER)) ASC,
LOCATION_NO,
SOURCE_REF1,
LPAD(SOURCE_REF2,4),
LPAD(SOURCE_REF3,4),
SOURCE_REF4

If you don’t speak SQL, it means roughly that it will show you pick list lines in the following order:

First, by Warehouse Route Order,

→ When warehouse Route Order is the same, then by Bay Route Order

→ When Bay Route Order is the same, by Rows Route Order

→ When Rows Route Order is the same, by Tiers Route Order

→ When Tiers Route Order is the same, By Bins Route Order

→ When Bins Route Order is the same, by Location_No

→ When Location is the same, by Source_Ref1

→ When Source_Ref1 is the same, by Source_Ref2

→ When Source_Ref2 is the same, by Source_Ref3

→ When Source_Ref3 is the same, by Source_Ref4

The groups mentioned above are either increasing in value if the route order can be converted to a number, or alphabetically if it cannot

It can’t order by just Rows lowest to highest because that makes no practical sense, you could be sending the operator from one warehouse to another 5 miles away then back to the original warehouse to pick the third item, just because the first 2 objects were technically on a low “Row”, but in completely different Warehouses or Bays.

In your case of the Inventory Location setup you shared, which isn’t complete, but if we assume consistent naming and route order setup, the pick list order you shared here makes sense that the Row number goes back down because it’s sending the operator to an entire bay altogether, so it starts again to increase the row amount for that new Bay (and, as you can see, it then increases Tier for that same new group of Rows):

So the order is localized, Inventory Locations basically being a Warehouse, Bays within the Warehouse, Rows and Tiers within those Bays, then Bins in each of those Row/Tier Combination.

By default, it therefore sends you the pick list in an order which requires the least amount of moving around for a Warehouse Operator, as long of course as the Route Orders have been set properly for each Inventory Location to define their logical physical proximity to one another

Just from your naming convention alone, I’m suspecting you guys inverted the concept of Bays and Rows, as your naming convention goes Warehouse-Row-Bay-Tier, when really they should be Warehouse-Bay-Row-Tier (or Warehouse-Bay-Row-Tier-Bin if you want Bin Level of Granularity).

A Bay is a Collection of Rows and Tiers, and Rows and Tiers hold Collections of Bins.

Hah, I got beat to the punch while writing my answer, but glad we came to the same conclusion =p

That’s going to be tough to fix the basic data for it. The Location Nos can’t be changed, and it’s unlikely you could get the business to relabel all their warehouse bays etc with what should be the correct order.

When printing on a piece of paper, you can probably change the order of the lines to make them match the order you want. Through Wadaco you can possibly also change the order but that’s not a simple configuration setup to do.

@SimonTestard thank you.  You confirmed what I suspected. Indeed, whoever initially set up the warehouse essentially reversed the rows and bays concept. When they refer to rows, they actually mean aisles, and when they use the term bays, I believe they’re referring to sections of the shelving units. Therefore, they want the pick list to follow a serpentine order through their rows (aisles) 1, 2, 3, 4, and so on. However, it’s not working because it’s going by bay first, then row.  Now that I understand, I need to find the best way to resolve this issue.  Open to any suggestions you may have. 

@SimonTestard Yes, they already have a hard copy report that has the order they want, but they are complaining that it does not match the WaDaCo scanner.  Trying to make the match, but I am learning WadaCo as I go, so it is a slow process for me.  I appreciate the feedback and confirming what I thought I was understanding from this post.  Now that I go a good understanding of the root cause, perhaps we can find a solution.